Isn’t it great to have to worry about this as a law-abiding citizen with something to lose? That’s the great thing about more laws... at some point you’ll have nothing left to lose and then you’ll be free.

Does anyone know if this draft of the changes has been approved and, if so, when the new 4473 will be implemented?

I noticed an interesting comment at the end of the article:

Quote:

Hmm… So people who can’t figure out if they’re male or female are free to purchase a firearm without picking one or the other. What about people who can’t figure out if they’re black or white?

Good point. The choices under "Race" are

American Indian or Alaskan Native

Asian

Black or African American

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

White

There's no option for "Mixed race." If someone has one parent who is 100% white ancestry and the other parent is 100% Black/African ancestry, they are 50/50 -- mixed race, or hybrid. If there's no choice for "Mixed Race," should that person self-identify on the 4473 as White, or as Black or African American? If he/she says "White," could he/she be prosecuted for perjury? Is that any more (or less) of a lie than if that person had checked the box for Black or African American?

Following up on my post above, I called the number provided for comments in the article. The woman who took my call said the BATFE cannot add another option for race, because those categories come from the Office of Management and Budget, and all federal agencies that collect such data must use the same, standard categories. The woman told me that people of mixed race can "self-identify" (her words -- which happen to be the same way I would describe it) as either Black or White ... or they can check both.

The reason the OMB controls this is because of the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB is required by Congressional act to approve the forms, to account for the cost of forms, and do things like constrain runaway form fields and excess and inconsistent field options. Notice the OMB number in the upper right corner of 4473.

If you question this, note that after a high profile shooting the FBI and news media know within an hour where the gun was sold and to who. You don't get that from leafing through old 4473s at a desk, that comes from computers. It is de facto registration, even though law enforcement is prohibited by law from compiling a database of firearms sales for gun registration. Years ago, my brother had some firearms stolen and reported them to the CA DOJ. The person he spoke with asked him his personal information, then what type of firearm was stolen, then proceeded to tell him where the guns were bought, the date of purchase, and the serial numbers.

If you question this, note that after a high profile shooting the FBI and news media know within an hour where the gun was sold and to who. You don't get that from leafing through old 4473s at a desk, that comes from computers. It is de facto registration, even though law enforcement is prohibited by law from compiling a database of firearms sales for gun registration.

And my question was a response to T. O'Heir's statement that

Quote:

Originally Posted by T. O'Heir

The new 4473 is also defacto firearm registration.

I asked:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aguila Blanca

How is it more a de facto registration than the version we use today?

I didn't dispute that the 4473 can be used as a de facto registration. I asked how the proposed new version would be any more so.

If someone has one parent who is 100% white ancestry and the other parent is 100% Black/African ancestry, they are 50/50 -- mixed race, or hybrid. If there's no choice for "Mixed Race," should that person self-identify on the 4473 as White, or as Black or African American? If he/she says "White," could he/she be prosecuted for perjury? Is that any more (or less) of a lie than if that person had checked the box for Black or African American?

Again, read the instructions.
This isn't anything new.

Quote:

Was President Obama Black, White, or Gray?

Gray has never been an option.

Quote:

I wonder how many FFLs and how many BATFE field agents know that?

Only those that bother reading the instructions that have been on every Form 4473 since 1968.

labnoti The reason the OMB controls this is because of the Paperwork Reduction Act. OMB is required by Congressional act to approve the forms, to account for the cost of forms, and do things like constrain runaway form fields and excess and inconsistent field options. Notice the OMB number in the upper right corner of 4473.

It's not just 4473's, but all federal forms.
In Special Education the federal paperwork asks the exact same biographical questions on the student as it does on a gun buyer.

Dogtown, can you explain how a sale can proceed if the information on the 4473 and the buyer's ID do not match??

I'm not trying to yank anybody's chain here, I'm not in the business, and I really don't know what allows what seems to be common sense... I can understand some leeway, possibly for simply checking the wrong box by mistake and correcting that, but don't ATF inspector consider errors in the paperwork something they can cite dealers over?

Is there a level of "mismatch" that is acceptable?

__________________
All else being equal (and it almost never is) bigger bullets tend to work better.

Of course not....read the instructions right next to the word "Race".
...
This isn't anything new.

Where are the instructions for the new form?

I didn't say this was anything new. My point is that we see more and more interracial marriages and relationships these days, but the 4473 doesn't provide a way to address the offspring of such marriages and relationships. The current form doesn't offer "Non-Binary" as a choice for gender, either. If they're going to revise the forum to add a spurious gender option that doesn't exist in the physical world, it seems to me they could (and should) also revise it to add a race choice for something that occurs quite often in the real world, and isn't scientifically invalid.

Scorch
... note that after a high profile shooting the FBI and news media know within an hour where the gun was sold and to who. You don't get that from leafing through old 4473s at a desk, that comes from computers.

Oh good grief.
If there's a "high profile shooting" the FBI and news media aren't going to know "where the gun was sold from and to who" from any federal computer. Mainly because ONLY THE DEALER HAS THAT INFORMATION! I have eleven years worth of 4473's that ATF has never seen and will not until I go out of business. And at age twenty those 4473's can be destroyed.

But......It may be possible to access a state firearm registration database....but states that require any sort of actual firearm registration are very few.

Quote:

Years ago, my brother had some firearms stolen and reported them to the CA DOJ. The person he spoke with asked him his personal information, then what type of firearm was stolen, then proceeded to tell him where the guns were bought, the date of purchase, and the serial numbers.

Legally, I think a person could pick any that they qualify for. Just ask Elizabeth Warren.

That makes for an interesting point. The instructions make it appear that the BATFE is doing a bit of social engineering, specifically with regard to Native Americans. If you read the instructions for the Race question, the entry begins:

Quote:

Race - one or more of the following responses must be selected: (1) American Indian or Alaska Native - A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains a tribal affiliation or community attachment; ...

They don't require that "tribal affiliation or community attachment," or anything even remotely similar, for any other race. Elizabeth Warren, even when she was actively claiming to be a Native American, didn't have any tribal affiliation (and she still doesn't), and she didn't maintain any Native American community attachment (and she still doesn't). Consequently, under the rules, she could be 75% Cherokee and she still should not check the box for "American Indian or Alaskan Native."

It seems that, for Native Americans and Alaskan Natives only, the BATFE is confusing race and ethnicity. It gets confusing. My late wife was from South America. She hated it when the U.S. government insisted that she had to declare herself as Hispanic. Her view -- as a native of a Latin American country -- was that "Hispanic" referred to people from Spain. She had never been to Spain, and she did NOT consider herself to be "Hispanic." It doesn't help when the .gov uses one set of rules for one race, and other rules for all the other races.

44 AMP Dogtown, can you explain how a sale can proceed if the information on the 4473 and the buyer's ID do not match??

As stated in the instructions on the 4473, the dealer must establish the identity, place of residence and age of the transferee/buyer. The buyer must provide a government issued photo ID that shows name, address and date of birth. A combination of government issued documents may be used. So, if the DL doesn't show current residence address?......bring another gov issued document like a motor vehicle registration or utility bill from any GOVERNMENT entity that has the buyers name and current residence address.
There is no requirement to have your race/height/weight match whats on your ID and no requirement to provide a document that verifies those. But the transferee/buyer is certifying under penalty of law that their answers on that Form 4473 are true, correct and complete.

Quote:

I'm not trying to yank anybody's chain here, I'm not in the business, and I really don't know what allows what seems to be common sense... I can understand some leeway, possibly for simply checking the wrong box by mistake and correcting that, but don't ATF inspector consider errors in the paperwork something they can cite dealers over?

Sure, ATF will cite any error or omission by the dealer.....but neither ATF or myself have any idea what race or ethnicity your momma was, and we don't weigh and measure transferees either.

Quote:

Is there a level of "mismatch" that is acceptable?

"Mismatch" isn't involved, merely having certain information provided. Now....if the buyer's ID shows a different birth date, different spelling of the name and his photo isn't him.....yeah thats a big nope on getting a gun.

Dealers who tell buyers filling out a 4473 "Make sure everything matches" are complicit in a felony if what the buyer writes down is not truthful. I've had buyers write down the address on their license and then tell me "I just moved" Well, bub, thats a felony.....as the form says you have to write down your current address. I kicked a lawyer out last summer for wanting to argue over the meaning of the word "current". (he didn't want to take the time to update his drivers license with an address change and did not have alternate documentation)

I didn't say this was anything new. My point is that we see more and more interracial marriages and relationships these days, but the 4473 doesn't provide a way to address the offspring of such marriages and relationships.

It sure as heck does.
Mother is Black, Father is half White, half Asian?..........buyer can select Black/White/Asian if he so desires.

Quote:

The current form doesn't offer "Non-Binary" as a choice for gender, either. If they're going to revise the forum to add a spurious gender option that doesn't exist in the physical world, it seems to me they could (and should) also revise it to add a race choice for something that occurs quite often in the real world, and isn't scientifically invalid.

First, the Form 4473 doesn't ask for gender, but sex. And the instructions on the new 4473 say "Individuals with neither male nor female on their identification documents should check Non-Binary. To me that means if your DL says "male" and the buyer checks "Non-Binary" or "Female".....they did not answer according to the instructions.

Again, you think "Multi" should be an option as a racial group but are ignoring the obvious options to choose multiple races.....Thats ""Multi"

Following up on my post above, I called the number provided for comments in the article. The woman who took my call said the BATFE cannot add another option for race, because those categories come from the Office of Management and Budget, and all federal agencies that collect such data must use the same, standard categories. The woman told me that people of mixed race can "self-identify" (her words -- which happen to be the same way I would describe it) as either Black or White ... or they can check both.

Interesting. Thanks for sharing that.

I don't screw around on 4473s. But...

I've had a few government agencies, two colleges, and a few medical offices get mad at me for checking everything, or nearly everything, on less important forms - sometimes including the "Other" and/or "Prefer not to answer" options.

About 10% of the time, they used white-out on the form and checked "White" after I had signed it.

I had an insurance form show up last year to update my information, after I tried an address change over the phone. In the gender section, there was an "Other" option. Apparently, "Siberian Tiger" is not a recognized gender. They sent me another one...

__________________
Don't even try it. It's even worse than the internet would lead you to believe.

Aguila Blanca
That makes for an interesting point. The instructions make it appear that the BATFE is doing a bit of social engineering, specifically with regard to Native Americans.

Again, this isn't coming from ATF. These changes will eventually appear on all federal forms that ask similar questions.

Quote:

It seems that, for Native Americans and Alaskan Natives only, the BATFE is confusing race and ethnicity.

Again, it ain't ATF!
OMB,OMB,OMB,OMB

Quote:

It gets confusing. My late wife was from South America. She hated it when the U.S. government insisted that she had to declare herself as Hispanic. Her view -- as a native of a Latin American country -- was that "Hispanic" referred to people from Spain. She had never been to Spain, and she did NOT consider herself to be "Hispanic." It doesn't help when the .gov uses one set of rules for one race, and other rules for all the other races.

I have buyers from India complain that they aren't Asian. Well the .gov disagrees.

When they separated Q10a and Q10b it has lead to nearly a third of customers failing to answer both question even though it says in bold print both must be answered.
Me: You need to answer 10a Hispanic or Not Hispanic Ethnicity.
Buyer: Im White.
Me: I know, you need to answer Hispanic or Not Hispanic, two different questions.
Buyer: Im not Hispanic, I'm White.
Me: Then check Not Hispanic.
Buyer: I'm not Mexican.
Me: Answer the question or get shot.

This email link is to reach site administrators for assistance, if you cannot access TFL via other means. If you are a TFL member and can access TFL, please do not use this link; instead, use the forums (like Questions, Suggestions, and Tech Support) or PM an appropriate mod or admin.

If you are experiencing difficulties posting in the Buy/Sell/Trade subforums of TFL, please read the "sticky" announcement threads at the top of the applicable subforum. If you still feel you are qualified to post in those subforums, please contact "Shane Tuttle" (the mod for that portion of TFL) via Private Message for assistance.

This email contact address is not an "Ask the Firearms Expert" service. Such emails will be ignored. If you have a firearm related question, please register and post it on the forums.